Journal 18: A breath
Submitted by Anonymous on Fri, 02/12/2010 - 06:54
I think the major difference I saw in reading versus watching was being able to see who was talking to who and see the feelings and expression on their faces. This helped the text to make more sense. I hadn't read the first part as angry as they acted it. And I didn't read Richard as so arrogant. It was good to see that. It was also important to hear the way they said each word. The intonation and the pauses they put in helped to give breath to the text. I was reading it so fast that much of it wasn't able to sink in. So after seeing the clip, I understand more about the storyline and also understand more about the characters' feelings and personalities.
I think I would have to a
I think I would have to a gree with you. I hated reading this play and I think that was becaus I was just reading to get through it. I found the text of this one to be rather dull by it self. When I watched the video I understood it a little better but I thought the whole video kind of sucked. When things were acts out in class it was interesting to see wha each person had to add to the tone and feel of the play. It actualy made it kind of fun and that's saying alot for this play because I kind of hated it.
Written to be acted
I really wonder what Shakespeare imagined as the futures of his plays. Did he think they'd really be acted out in tongues and nations that didn't exist during his time? It's possible... there's evidence for that. But did he think that the words would be printed so freely to be read by one person silently from a page? I tend to think that wasn't what he envisioned. All plays are meant to be acted, not just read. There's a fundamental difference between a novel and a play. And you can't simply read the play aloud or have different people reading different parts and suddenly have a play. It takes development, rehearsal, and (truly) an audience to appreciate the work in the context Shakespeare wrote it for. makes it difficult to study the plays in a class, but the movie really helped bring those aspects in.
Erin Kay Schulz
Too true
There are some plays that can be read as a story. Wicked, for example, also comes in book form and tells the same story. There's so much of a storyline there, that it's easy to understand and portray feelings. For an example of another that can't be simply read, I though of the play Wit. This play, while it does have plenty of storyline, has too much feeling to be held on a page. So much of what the actor says must be accompanied by a facial expression or gesticulation. I think many of Shakespeare's plays are like that.
-Renee Ward
words as script
I'm trying to get us to think of these words on the page as more of a script than a text that is inviolate. One thing to keep in mind is the earliest known printed copies are not based on actual scripts that someone have somewhere, written in the hand of the immortal Bard. This adds to the mystery of the plays and the playwright. One would think that there must be working scripts that have survived, but I've never heard of any. These would shed quite a bit of light on how the plays were to to be staged, but if they are out there, that's one heck of a treasure waiting to be stumbled upon. Bradley
Bradley